The Death of Pretty

[Guest]

I want to be desirable and sexy to my husband (and I am ), but I'm not seeking to be that way to the rest of the world. I have 5 children so I'm obviously not a virgin, but I am still innocent because I have obeyed the laws of chastity and the bounds under those laws. I am virtuous and clean and without guilt. (Had I sinned, I could have repented and remained innocent, of course.)

I want to be pretty because I like it, and because we've been told to be neat and comely. I don't want to chase after looking "hot" to anyone but my husband, so I dress modestly and don't flirt with men and behave in a way that my actions are in harmony with my identity as a virtuous daughter of God. (Now that's my brand of feminism!)

[HEthePrimate]

Sometimes, you just need to tell your inner feminist to shut up.

Now there's a respectful, grownup response for you!

I believe innocence is associated with lack of guilt. Christ was innocent, not naive.

True, though people also often use it as a descriptor for children. If you look around at our culture, our tv commercials, ads in magazines, etc., the "innocent" look is often deliberately linked to childhood, even when the models are adult women.

Perhaps for the same reason that Elder Bednar told us men at the last Priesthood Session that we should be "good boys":

I simply wanted to be a good boy. The Lord needs all of us as bearers of His authority to be honorable, virtuous, and good boys at all times and in all places.

You can be a "boy" if you want--I am a man.

See, now, that's your inner feminist ranting when it should be keeping its trap shut.

Again, way to elevate the discourse, Vort!

[HEthePrimate]

I want to be desirable and sexy to my husband (and I am ), but I'm not seeking to be that way to the rest of the world. I have 5 children so I'm obviously not a virgin, but I am still innocent because I have obeyed the laws of chastity and the bounds under those laws. I am virtuous and clean and without guilt. (Had I sinned, I could have repented and remained innocent, of course.)

I want to be pretty because I like it, and because we've been told to be neat and comely. I don't want to chase after looking "hot" to anyone but my husband, so I dress modestly and don't flirt with men and behave in a way that my actions are in harmony with my identity as a virtuous daughter of God. (Now that's my brand of feminism!)

Indeed, many (though not necessarily all, IMHO) of the "hot" women look like prostitutes, and therefore not innocent in the sense of guilt-free. And kudos to you for wanting to please your husband and not flirt with other men. But I wasn't saying you should do otherwise.

[Guest]

Indeed, many (though not necessarily all, IMHO) of the "hot" women look like prostitutes, and therefore not innocent in the sense of guilt-free. And kudos to you for wanting to please your husband and not flirt with other men. But I wasn't saying you should do otherwise.

I was just trying to provide context for the word "innocent". Maybe it's not how you see the world's definition of innocent, but I'm not really concerned about what the world thinks.

[Vort]

True, though people also often use it as a descriptor for children.

So therefore, calling a woman "innocent" is tantamount to calling her "childish"?

Not even you can believe that.

You can be a "boy" if you want--I am a man.

And yet, there's that pesky apostle using the term.

You asked a question, I answered it. Now you want to change it into a pissing contest. Whatever.

Again, way to elevate the discourse, Vort!

You are welcome. Way to avoid any discussion and instead stick to your meaningless talking points.

[HEthePrimate]

So therefore, calling a woman "innocent" is tantamount to calling her "childish"?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

And yet, there's that pesky apostle using the term.

So?

[Vort]

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

Now, seriously. You are a reasonably intelligent man. Do you really, truly need me to spell it out in excruciating detail?

Here we go. Pay attention.

The original poster posted an essay that read, in part:

Our problem is that society doesn’t value innocence anymore, real or imagined. Nobody aspires to innocence anymore. Nobody wants to be thought of as innocent, the good girl. They want to be hot, not pretty.

You then asked the stunningly oblivious question:

Why the emphasis on innocence? What does "innocence" mean? Isn't innocence associated with childhood?

Taking you at your word, I assumed your question was in earnest, and answered:

I believe innocence is associated with lack of guilt. Christ was innocent, not naive.

You then asserted:

True, though people also often use it as a descriptor for children.

Here, you admit that the essayist used the term in a perfectly correct manner, adding only that there is sometimes another usage. So I wrote the obvious rhetorical question:

So therefore, calling a woman "innocent" is tantamount to calling her "childish"?

The clear answer to which is, "No, of course not, not in every case, and obviously not in the essayist's case, where his terms were clearly spelled out."

But instead, you answer my rhetorical question with "Sometimes yes, sometimes no." What, are you still hopelessly confused as to what the essayist might possibly have meant in decrying the loss of innocence in women? Even after admitting the meaning of the word "innocent", you continue in demanding that his usage of the term was an infantilization of women?

As I said before: Sometimes, you really just need to tell your inner feminist to shut up.

So?

Really? Again? You are having that much trouble following the conversation that you can't figure out from post to post what the obvious point is?

Again, let me help you. Please pay very close attention so that perhaps you can understand.

Your "inner feminist" apparently taking yet more inappropriate offense at the use of the term "good girl", you demanded:

Why would someone want to be perceived as a "good girl" when she's actually an adult woman? Don't women want to be taken seriously as adults, rather than infantilized by being thought of as children, or childlike?

I responded that this usage was exactly similar to Elder Bednar's usage of the term "good boy" in a recent Priesthood Session General Conference talk. My point, obviously, was that those of us who believe Elder Bednar to be an apostle and who therefore hearken to his words are not (or at least ought not to be) offended at his use of the term "good boy" to describe fully grown, and even old, men. Since this usage is not offensive (except perhaps to the hypersensitive and those not comfortable in their masculinity), there is little reason to think that the exact same usage applied to the other sex is offensive.

Yet your irrational "inner feminist" apparently could not process this simple feat of logic. Your response -- You can be a "boy" if you want--I am a man -- was laughable, and completely avoided the entire point of the conversation.

Now that I have explained things to you in excruciating detail, I hope you understand a bit better.

Edited June 20, 2012 by Vort

[HEthePrimate]

Vort, I think you're making a bigger deal of this than necessary. I am not against innocence. I am not against prettiness. I am not against "hotness," either, unless one defines "hot" as meaning the same thing as "slutty," which I do not. It is possible the author of the article did not mean "childlike" when he said "innocent," but in our society it often is used that way. I am merely arguing in favor of being mindful of one's language.

There are times when it's okay to refer to a woman as a girl, as in "girls' night out." There are times when it is not appropriate to call a woman a girl, and you will offend someone if you do. Same with the word "boy."

I think you overreacted to what I said, and you answered me rudely.

Edited June 20, 2012 by estradling75
Rule 6

[Vort]

Perhaps you're right. I'll have to give it some thought later.

[HEthePrimate]

Perhaps you're right. I'll have to give it some thought later.

Thank you, Vort. Maybe I could have stated my position more clearly, too.

Although sometimes discussions like this can serve to clarify one's thinking. With all the back-and-forth, and seeing how others react to what I said, it can help me think things through a little more, and make me restate things in order to communicate better. I'm the type of person who "thinks on paper" (or in this case, a computer monitor), and it's rare that things come out exactly right the first time.

Peace.

[Vort]

Thank you, Vort. Maybe I could have stated my position more clearly, too.

Although sometimes discussions like this can serve to clarify one's thinking. With all the back-and-forth, and seeing how others react to what I said, it can help me think things through a little more, and make me restate things in order to communicate better. I'm the type of person who "thinks on paper" (or in this case, a computer monitor), and it's rare that things come out exactly right the first time.

I think you are right. I was rude, condescending, and out of line. I apologize. Thank you for your level-headed response.

I, too, have an inner feminist. But I don't really like her very much, and she's been wrong so often that I keep her on a short leash and try to ignore her as much as possible. I just suspect the world (or at least US society) would be a better place if people paid much less attention to their inner feminist and instead listened to their inner reasonable adult.

[annewandering]

'irrational 'inner feminist' '? Seriously?

[Kinomon]

Well, coming from a guy's perspective, I like young women who try to be "pretty". It's not like those who are not according to skippy's definition are not important. Girls who dress immodestly or present themselves "hot" just sell themselves short. They are daughters of Heavenly Father, and lived in His presence for thousands of years. I suppose some may not know any better now; because of the Veil.

But concerning girls who have lived darker lives than others and are struggling and trying to make the best of themselves, I commend you. You have gone through horrible, terrible struggles, and these things in your past have the potential to draw you closer to Christ, who suffered for everyone. Your Father has such great blessings for you in the world to come. Don't ever give up! I love you, sisters of mine.

[Misshalfway]

What if you are like halfway between pretty and hot?

[Kinomon]

Do you mean, like, someone who is in spiritual warfare? It all depends on which side wins. :) Feed your spiritual side instead of your carnal side; it's what life is all about! You are always either progressing or receding.

[Misshalfway]

Well, coming from a guy's perspective, I like young women who try to be "pretty". It's not like those who are not according to skippy's definition are not important. Girls who dress immodestly or present themselves "hot" just sell themselves short. They are daughters of Heavenly Father, and lived in His presence for thousands of years. I suppose some may not know any better now; because of the Veil.

But concerning girls who have lived darker lives than others and are struggling and trying to make the best of themselves, I commend you. You have gone through horrible, terrible struggles, and these things in your past have the potential to draw you closer to Christ, who suffered for everyone. Your Father has such great blessings for you in the world to come. Don't ever give up! I love you, sisters of mine.

Selling themselves short is right, but I think men have to take some (and I emphasize 'some') responsibility here. Women are doing it to attract the men. And it works!!!!! If it didn't, I guarantee women wouldn't be doing it. Being sexy is pain! Try wearing a 80" heals and a thong. I got my nails done the other day and felt like I'd been in a street fight!

My point is that we don't do it cause it's fun. Alright....not completely. We do it because we know what happens when we don't. Well, that and to beat out the competition of other females who might steal male attention. But at the end of the day, it is the men, and their carnal,fantasy-based projections, that have been driving this decline since the beginning.

Men NEED women. They need them for nurturing, mothering.... and they NEED them to satisfy their fantasies so they can beat their chests and compensate for that feeling of inferiority within. And women NEED men. They need support and devotion. It's survival on both basic and emotional fronts. The powerlessness that women feel with the flightiness of men, drives them to compromise. And they often fail to appreciate the costliness of the exchange. But trust me. If men didn't objectify, women would be buying heck of a lot less makeup and a lot more baseball hats!

[Misshalfway]

OH.......and equating "innocent" with the ideal of "pretty" is just stupid. I'm not beautiful because I'm innocent. (Truthfully this sounds like another fantasy of men and their need to take down the virgin.)

I'm beautiful because I'm an individual...because I know who I am......because my knowledge and experience has expanded my abilities, and talent, and faith. And all that shines on the outside of me and enhances the body life gave me. THIS is what sexy really is!

One more note....society is trying to sexualize men too. And men, just like the women before them, are caving to it.

Edited July 14, 2012 by Misshalfway

[Misshalfway]

OH.......and equating "innocent" with the ideal of "pretty" is just stupid. I'm not beautiful because I'm innocent. (Truthfully this sounds like another fantasy of men and their need to take down the virgin.)

And I kind of resent the word 'pretty', as if outward appearance was all that made a person attractive. I prefer the word beautiful. It's much more broad and I appreciate concepts like that in a world that would minimize so much of what is important.

And I'm beautiful because I'm an individual...because I know who I am......because my knowledge and experience has expanded my abilities, and talent, and faith. And all that shines on the outside of me and enhances the body life gave me. And I was beautiful when I was young and innocent too....before the ways of men and things.

One more note....society is trying to sexualize men too. And men, just like the women before them, are caving to it. It's a pitfall designed by satan for all of us.

[Vort]

Truthfully this sounds like another fantasy of men and their need to take down the virgin.

Fwiw, this does not sound like the word of someone who loves men. I don't disbelieve that you love men, but such statements as above make it sound as if you do not.

[Misshalfway]

Fwiw, this does not sound like the word of someone who loves men. I don't disbelieve that you love men, but such statements as above make it sound as if you do not.

Well, you can hear what you want to hear. Just be careful you don't miss the point.

[Vort]

Well, you can hear what you want to hear. Just be careful you don't miss the point.

The point seems to be that men have fantasies of wanting and even needing to take down a virgin.

[Misshalfway]

The point seems to be that men have fantasies of wanting and even needing to take down a virgin.

And your point is......

[Vort]

And your point is......

My point can best be expressed as follows:

"Fwiw, this does not sound like the word of someone who loves men. I don't disbelieve that you love men, but such statements as above make it sound as if you do not."

[Misshalfway]

Whether or not I "love" men is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that sometimes men get confused. What is relevant is that sometimes women get confused too. What I don't love is how this "confusion" manifests itself in attitudes, behaviors, and how it causes both to live below their capabilities.

[Vort]

Whether or not I "love" men is irrelevant.

As a man, the son of a man, the brother of two men, and the father of four men, I find it relevant. But as I stated initially, I offered the comment for what it was worth to you. Apparently, it is not of worth to you, which is fine.